D200_4me

D200_4me

Lives in United States United States
Has a website at http://www.openbloom.com/
Joined on Feb 2, 2006
About me:

www.openbloom.com is where you'll find most of my photos. :-)

Comments

Total: 141, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

olivier_777: As a consequence, nobody can produce soap bars any more, because soap bars look like a Nikon 1.

Fine with me. I hate soap bars. I only use liquid soap these days. Makes cleaning the shower much easier too :-)

Direct link | Posted on Dec 7, 2013 at 10:29 UTC
In reply to:

Polytropia: Having handled a preproduction A7, I must say, it's quite light with the kit lens. It feels no heavier than my OM-D E-M1, though I have to say, I for one won't be giving up my E-M1, even after handling the A7.

I think the A7 is fantastic, don't get me wrong. Many people will buy it and love it. I was very impressed with it!

But considering the largest print I've made was a 144"x133" off of the 10mp E-3, and it looked great, I personally do not generally need 24mp or 36mp.

But I can't imagine life without E-M1's stabilizer. Once you've had it there's really no going back.

The 35mm sensor format, about which everyone seems to obsess, does not present any substantial advantages to me; I never, ever run into ISO noise issues with E-M1, and I have no issues getting the bokeh I want.

I constantly use E-M1's in-camera RAW development capabilities, multitudinous function buttons, touch-screen to set focus points, etc., all features the A7 lacks.

Sensor size is not a trump card for me.

I know what you mean. In a few years when my D600 is due to be replaced, I'll likely move away from DSLR and go back to another Olympus m4/3 camera (had the E-M5 before). Or Fuji X. Just depends on what's available at the time....but the E-M5 files and the stabilization left me very impressed and wanting more.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 22, 2013 at 13:38 UTC

Seems to have slightly more noise than the D610 at high ISO raw, but just barely. Either way, looks excellent, like most modern full frame cameras at 6400.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 22, 2013 at 13:36 UTC as 17th comment
On DPReview Gear of the Year - Part 1: Fujifilm X100S article (307 comments in total)

Different strokes for different folks, as they say. It's a good thing there are plenty of other options for people that don't like the X100S. ;-) I'm afraid some people will never be happy with what they have or even what someone else decides to use. Life is short. Pick a camera and enjoy it.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2013 at 12:07 UTC as 24th comment
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Review preview (559 comments in total)

Once again, people have been personally offended and insulted by a review. ;-) The reviews contain a lot of useful information, regardless of the score given at the end. I know there are many other sites that have reviews, so rather than get upset about the score, I guess you could go look at another site that has a score you agree with? :-) I mean...if that makes you feel better. I've owned several cameras that didn't get a gold award here. So what? I liked them anyway.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 7, 2013 at 13:41 UTC as 131st comment
On Nikon Df preview (2817 comments in total)

The more I look at this model and think about it, the more I agree with this statement: "My worry about the Df is that Nikon might have gone too far backwards for the sake of cosmetic appeal, without really adding any practical benefit to the shooting experience." It's hard to pleas everyone, but it does seem like they took the simplification just a tad too far. Either way, more camera models to choose from is a good thing (as long as these companies stay in business to keep making many different models for us to pick from) :-)

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2013 at 19:23 UTC as 527th comment | 3 replies
On Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows article (1514 comments in total)

I'll never understand why people get so worked up over new cameras. I mean, all the complaints and "they should have done this or that" comments. Seriously folks...if you don't like a certain new camera, don't buy it. You don't have to act like a child in public over it. Grow up a little :-) It seems everyone here is a expert market analyst and knows exactly what the public wants. Oh and they're the best engineers in the world too...much, much smarter than any camera manufacturers teams ;-) That's how they act anyway. Too funny.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 2, 2013 at 11:45 UTC as 208th comment | 5 replies
On DSC00108 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (7 comments in total)
In reply to:

guamy: It doesn't look like a barbeque pit..anyone knows what it is?

Probably Whiskey production. I guess :-) I think it's Jack Daniels

Direct link | Posted on Oct 30, 2013 at 00:45 UTC
On Fujifilm X-E2 Preview preview (454 comments in total)
In reply to:

mas54: I think dpr and all other review sites should refuse to review any more cameras that don't have optical viewfinders. Just consider them non entities. Maybe the camera companies will get the hint.

There are plenty of people that don't really care about an optical viewfinder. I rarely use it on my X100S.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 19, 2013 at 18:38 UTC
On Sony Alpha A7 / A7R preview (2381 comments in total)

World's smallest....until you put something you need on it....a lens ;-) Innovation is good and I welcome it, but I wish companies would quit screaming about how small their camera bodies are.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 16, 2013 at 08:18 UTC as 694th comment | 7 replies

I got a D610 months ago...when they replaced my shutter for free ;-)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 8, 2013 at 09:08 UTC as 37th comment
On Zeiss announces 'no compromise' Otus 55mm F1.4 article (507 comments in total)

Autofocus would be nice....it's 2013 :-)

Direct link | Posted on Oct 7, 2013 at 11:54 UTC as 111th comment | 6 replies

Still, very, very minor difference that probably no one would ever be able to notice when viewing photos not zoomed in at 100%. Sure, it's great to have the best conversion possible, but I still believe the job Adobe does is much more than adequate and I would never sacrifice my quick AND easy workflow with Lightroom. Import and convert to DNG at the same time and I'm all done. No TIFFs to deal with, etc, etc. I would be shocked if anyone could truly see a difference even in large prints unless you were making extremely large prints, which I imagine very few people ever do.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 2, 2013 at 22:07 UTC as 20th comment
On Google+ gets improved Raw-to-JPEG conversion article (50 comments in total)

Hmmm....I didn't even know they supported raw in the first place :-) I guess that's just not something I need Google to do for me.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 27, 2013 at 00:36 UTC as 17th comment

Hmmm...if they keep making more and more awesome bodies and lenses like this, I may finally feel fine getting rid of my FF DSLR. I loved the image quality of the E-M5 I had, but I could never get used to that weird body. It just felt bad in my hands. I hope they addressed the squishy buttons in this new model too ;-) Next time around, I may not buy another SLR. I may very well be on my last SLR.....maybe.

Direct link | Posted on Sep 10, 2013 at 10:59 UTC as 33rd comment | 1 reply

The thing to remember about comments is that all reasonable people will instantly recognize when other people are making unreasonable comments. It all works out in the end, even if some idiots post stupid comments :-)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 26, 2013 at 12:23 UTC as 104th comment | 1 reply
On DSC01505 photo in dpreview review samples's photo gallery (1 comment in total)

Yum :-)

Direct link | Posted on Aug 19, 2013 at 23:25 UTC as 1st comment
In reply to:

D200_4me: Honestly, there's nothing really 'wrong' with the Nikon 1 system other than the image quality just can't match larger sensors like m4/3....and that's the people looking at these type of cameras....people buying Sony NEX, Micro 4/3 systems, etc. If the image quality was there, it would sell much better.

Some people care about some other things besides JUST image quality. But sure, image quality is major, especially to the pixel peepers/measurebators. No matter how good the image quality is, if you hate using the camera, what's the point? So yes, it needs to be acceptable in other ways like handling, etc. I like the most bang for the buck, so i try to find something I enjoy using and of course out of those type of cameras I enjoy using, try to find something that also has good image quality. For me, I decided to use a few different cameras, for different purposes....and one of them is my all around good performer that I take if I don't want to worry about regretting not having certain features or image quality available (D600).

Direct link | Posted on Aug 8, 2013 at 23:41 UTC

Honestly, there's nothing really 'wrong' with the Nikon 1 system other than the image quality just can't match larger sensors like m4/3....and that's the people looking at these type of cameras....people buying Sony NEX, Micro 4/3 systems, etc. If the image quality was there, it would sell much better.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 8, 2013 at 22:57 UTC as 200th comment | 7 replies
On Panasonic GX7 First Impressions Review article (1201 comments in total)

Looks aren't everything....but boy that thing is ugly ;-) They should have abandoned their attempt to make it look more like a Fuji X100. The retro look works great for the X100. It just looks weird on the GX7.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 1, 2013 at 19:28 UTC as 297th comment | 5 replies
Total: 141, showing: 41 – 60
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »